Like it? share away

This site is about scientific evidence – so what’s the evidence versus Lance Armstrong then? ‘ Isn’t it all a witch hunt?’ ‘Where’s the smoking gun?’ ‘It’s all hearsay’… I hadn’t intended to talk doping this week but these are the comments I have had this week from students, colleagues and friends. So I thought I would set out the evidence here!

Late in October the US Anti Doping Agency released their ‘Reasoned Decision’ document detailing their investigation into Lance Armstrong and his cycling team. The report was several hundred pages and included hundreds more in individual affidavits and other paperwork. Don’t worry – you won’t have to read them all – I will present a summary of the key evidence below.

The report is mainly based on witness testimony, but also contained the section ‘Scientific evidence that corroborates Lance Armstrong’s doping violations’. This is only around five pages out of the whole report and details the following:

Athlete Biological Passport violation

Introduced in 2008 by the Union Cycliste International (UCI, cycling’s governing body), the Athlete Biological Passport monitors certain blood parameters over time. Whilst the human body is extremely complex and not entirely predictable, there are certain things you would expect to see in the blood samples from a rider during a three week cycling Tour. Lance’s 7 Tour victories were all achieved before the introduction of the ABP but his comeback in 2009 was after its introduction.

2009 and 2010 Tours de France – There were two items of interest in the 2009 and 2010 Tours. Firstly his blood samples showed suppressed production of red blood cells (measured immature blood cells decreased) which is a marker of blood doping. This pattern was repeated during the 2010 Tour. There were seven samples from these two Tours which showed this pattern. An Australian expert, Professor Christopher Gore, estimated the likelihood of this pattern occurring naturally was less than one in a million.

Secondly the blood samples showed an odd pattern with regard to the plasma volume. Plasma (the liquid part of blood) has been shown to increase in volume during extreme endurance events. Mid way through the 2009 Tour Lance’s plasma volume decreased over several days, reversing the usual trend. This is not normal.

The actual data for this has not been published so has not been verified. Armstrong did publish several of the values on his personal website (since removed) and it was commented on by several experts that they did not appear normal.

‘If it were confirmed that he was doping in 2009–10, then he can get fucked, completely.’ Brad Wiggins

EPO Positive samples

These relate to samples from two years – 1999 and 2001.

1999 Tour de France Samples

There were no EPO tests in 1999. The French lab (LNDD) froze samples from the 1999 TdF and re analysed them in 2004. Six of the samples that tested positive for EPO were linked to Lance using the doping forms. These tests were conducted on the B sample only (the reserve portion of the sample) and were for research purposes, which is why they did not result in a sanction.

2001 Tour de Suisse Samples

During the 2001 Tour de Suisse at least one of the urine samples taken from Lance was labelled as ‘suspect’ by the lab. The standard in 2001 required the exogenous (‘foreign’) parts of EPO measured to be greater than 80 % of the total EPO present. Under today’s standard these would be considered positive as the procedures allow some discretion as long as certain criteria are met. WADA Technical Document – TD2009EPO.

Another interesting detail in the file is the debunking of the ‘tested 500-600 times and never tested positive’ spin heard from the Lance camp. The report indicated it is more likely to be 260 or so times, with not all of those being full drug screens.

Summary

The evidence is enough to lead USADA to conclude he doped. There are pages and pages of team mates and other eye witness testimony. Eye witness testimony is admissible in a court. As for science, the evidence they present is incomplete but telling. They do not present the full data they have available for the ABP, which would allow independent scrutiny.

Would this be enough in a court of law ‘beyond reasonable doubt’? How about a sports tribunal at ‘on the balance of probabilities’? I’ve read it all and I am convinced. How about you? Let me know in the comments below…

Like it? share away

About Dr Tom Bassindale

Dr Tom Bassindale is a forensic scientist, and the founder of We Are Forensic. He's managed hundreds of forensic toxicology cases, and is an experienced court witness. He has specialist expertise in forensic toxicology and drug testing in sport. Dr B is currently a senior lecturer at Sheffield Hallam University. And yes... he watches CSI.

That’s a very good question. During chemo he may well have been treated with EPO to enhance recovery and treat related anaemia. EPO is produced in the kidneys and I would think it would be produced as normal after treatment if the kidneys were unaffected. If anything was affected it would be more likely to decrease the EPO produced rather than increase. I’ll have a read around that and let you know if I find anything more detailed. Thanks for the comment!

Frankly, an innocent person would surely contest the evidence, although I guess it was tiring for him to battle against constant allegations, but if he was a genuine competitor, he’d of surely fought for his innocence and fought for his prestigious victories.

From reading a bit of document (god it’s long) it seems the evidence was stacked against him. The fact there were so many testimonies against him and even more evidence not bought to the hearing, there’s not much to say other than guilty!

I often think about how other riders, for example Alberto Contador, always seem to dip under the radar when allegations of taking PED.
Okay he got stripped of a tour de france and banned for a bit, but it seems a bit off that he’d only just been found out taking drugs and not before?

I think a better line needs to be clear set of regulations when giving out punishments. If you are found cheating = banned & stripped of your wins.

Some good points there. Yes, he may have got tired of fighting, but as you say the weight of testimony was probably enough to kill any chance of defending himself. There are still riders who will go under the radar. From the testimony and the evidence from Tyler Hamilton’s book we can see the Drs behind the scene have very good knowledge of the drugs used (pharmacokinetics etc), the testing methods and their limitations. I think in many cases that the rider is not acting along so their needs to be more action against the people aiding them.

WADA has helped standardise the punishments but there is obviously more to be done. Thanks again 3rd Yr.

Thanks for the summary Dr Tom.
Ever since finding nyvelocity.com a few years ago and their various interviews with Ashenden (and of course Toto) I never had a doubt over Armstrong’s cleanliness (or Contador’s for that matter). Still quite staggered that USADA managed to get their reasoned decision out their before any American politicians, lawyers etc.managed to shut them up. Those affidavits make for very interesting reading.
Probably not your area of expertise Tom but I find the debate about whether there are long term performance enhancing benefits to ex-dopers from their years of increased training/racing (due to PED use) at both a physiological as well as psychological levels very interesting. Will that result in an uneven playing field even 5 years on from the alleged last act of doping compared to athletes that have never doped.

Cheers Ben. The politics of this do seem to be hard to ignore, someone has friends in high places!

Some of the drugs used will have no discernible effect after they leave the body (amphetamines for example). Some will have longer effects due to the more permanent changes in the body (growth hormone and steroids for example). The lasting effects of these could include an increased muscle bulk (or limiting the loss of muscle in stage racing for example). As you know power to weight is the big thing so increases in power through acquisition of lean tissue is what you want. There are probably effects such as alteration on VO2 max and metabolism changes but these go beyond my area of expertise.

Quite. If I start beating you up hills you will know my research has crossed certain ethical lines.

Edited to say I did mean to add in summary that I am fairly sure the long term effects of training and racing on PEDs for a long time period would be hard to replicate in any other way and would likely lead to both physiological and psychological advantages for a while afterwards, whether that be a season or 5 years I do not know.

Very nice summary Tom. I believe that the French lab tested the ’99TdF samples anonymously as part of the EPO urine test validation, as published in Francoise Lasne’s original Nature article in 2000. Legend has it a L’Equipe journalist got hold of the sample code and managed to link it to the Texan.

Thanks CB. So would it be correct to say they were analysed as part of the validation and then LNDD reanalysed them (perhaps B samples this time) in 2004 (as reported by USADA)? Seems perhaps they have been analysed twice then? I will have to re-read the Nature paper – someone gave it to me during my PhD but haven’t read it since! I believe L’Equipe got hold of the sample codes and the UCI gave them the original forms to link them. Thanks for the insight.

Ah. Re-reading Lasne’s 2000 Nature article shows it was the ’98 TdF samples that were tested for that paper ‘for research purposes’. 14/102 were clearly positive – wasn’t 1998 the Festina Willy Voet scandal?
I will have to read the relevant pages of the USADA document to check the details of the ’99 samples but I doubt they were analysed twice due to volume issues – my mistake.

Christiaan Bartlett on Jamaicans and footballers: how to interpret a single urine sample3rd Apr 17The contaminated meat causing clenbuterol positives is a real thing:
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2011-10/wada-withdraws-cas-appeal-in-case-of-mexican-footballers
but as you say this exoneration maybe only possible because players …